Boomerang Attacks
Having complained about the negative campaigning of the Conservatives during the general election, Ed Miliband seems to have chosen a boomerang as his weapon of choice in an effort to be taken more seriously on foreign affairs.
Now the decision for the UK to support a limited intervention in the Libyan civil war was taken on a cross party basis at the time, quite rightly if you ask me, and the driving force was a humanitarian desire to prevent a massacre of civilians in the second city of Benghazi which was encircled by the forces of Colonel Gaddafi.
No one including Ed Miliband and the Labour Party was seriously suggesting that there should be 'boots on the ground' to prevent rival Muslim factions from killing each other which unhappily is what has happened since the dictator Gaddafi was deposed.
But the responsibility for that lies with the different branches of Islam which seem unable to live in peace while respect the views and cultures of other citizens including fellow Muslims.
So Ed Miliband's personal attack on David Cameron looks very ill-judged and is likely to rebound badly on him, if you ask me.
General Election 2015: Miliband branded ‘shameful’ as negative campaigning stoops to new low over migrant crisis
Labour leader makes rare intervention on foreign affairs but is attacked after blaming the PM partly responsible for Mediterranean migrant deaths
By MATT DATHAN - The Independent
Ed Miliband has been branded as “shameful” by Downing Street over blaming David Cameron partly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of migrants in the Mediterranean.
The Labour leader will make a rare intervention on foreign affairs today with a stinging attack on the Prime Minister’s role in creating instability in Libya, which has led to thousands of north Africans drowning in the Mediterranean as they try to flee the crisis.
A senior Conservative source described Mr Miliband’s attack as “deeply provocative” and demanded he apologise for “trying to score political points from the terrible events we have witnessed in the Mediterranean."
Ed Miliband has been branded as “shameful” by Downing Street over blaming David Cameron partly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of migrants in the Mediterranean.
The Labour leader will make a rare intervention on foreign affairs today with a stinging attack on the Prime Minister’s role in creating instability in Libya, which has led to thousands of north Africans drowning in the Mediterranean as they try to flee the crisis.
A senior Conservative source described Mr Miliband’s attack as “deeply provocative” and demanded he apologise for “trying to score political points from the terrible events we have witnessed in the Mediterranean."
David Cameron in Libya in 2011Cabinet minister Liz Truss also hit out at Mr Miliband, saying it was “outrageous and disgraceful,” to bring the migrant crisis into the election campaign. "Actually accusing the Prime Minister of causing these deaths - whether directly or indirectly - I think is wrong,” she said.
But Labour’s shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander accused the Tories of trying to manufacture the row.
Mr Miliband, who will speak at the Chatham House think tank, says the current migrant crisis in the Mediterranean could have been avoided if Mr Cameron had “stood by the people of Libya in practice” rather than “only in principle”.
He will compare Labour’s “genuine and hard-headed multilateralism” with Mr Cameron’s “pessimistic isolationism” on the world stage.
But Labour’s shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander accused the Tories of trying to manufacture the row.
Mr Miliband, who will speak at the Chatham House think tank, says the current migrant crisis in the Mediterranean could have been avoided if Mr Cameron had “stood by the people of Libya in practice” rather than “only in principle”.
He will compare Labour’s “genuine and hard-headed multilateralism” with Mr Cameron’s “pessimistic isolationism” on the world stage.
Miliband rarely makes speeches on foreign policy
He will say: “In Libya Labour supported military action to avoid the slaughter Gaddafi threatened in Benghazi. But since the action, the failure of post-conflict planning has become obvious. David Cameron was wrong to assume that Libya’s political culture and institutions could be left to evolve and transform on their own.
“What we have seen in Libya is that when tensions over power and resource began to emerge, they simply reinforced deep-seated ideological and ethnic fault lines in the country, meaning the hopes of the revolutionary uprisings quickly began to unravel.
He will say: “In Libya Labour supported military action to avoid the slaughter Gaddafi threatened in Benghazi. But since the action, the failure of post-conflict planning has become obvious. David Cameron was wrong to assume that Libya’s political culture and institutions could be left to evolve and transform on their own.
“What we have seen in Libya is that when tensions over power and resource began to emerge, they simply reinforced deep-seated ideological and ethnic fault lines in the country, meaning the hopes of the revolutionary uprisings quickly began to unravel.
Prime Minister David Cameron takes a walk through Martyrs Square in the capital of Libya"The tragedy is that this could have been anticipated. It should have been avoided. And Britain could have played its part in ensuring the international community stood by the people of Libya in practice rather than standing behind the unfounded hopes of potential progress only in principle.”
Defending his leader’s attack, Mr Alexander said Mr Cameron had "abjectly failed" to engage in effective post-conflict planning.
"I do think David Cameron waded in and then walked away. It is a failure of post-conflict planning for which the international community bears responsibility. That's not a matter of dispute. It's simply a matter of fact."
Defending his leader’s attack, Mr Alexander said Mr Cameron had "abjectly failed" to engage in effective post-conflict planning.
"I do think David Cameron waded in and then walked away. It is a failure of post-conflict planning for which the international community bears responsibility. That's not a matter of dispute. It's simply a matter of fact."
